Liverpool FC Forum

by **Big Niall** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 10:26 am

It seems that a physical team can bully Liverpool out of a game. Carragher and SG have metal but the others all seam a bit soft.

I know we are poor quality but we still are better quality than Birmingham. I think we lack a bit of balls.

by **hawkmoon269** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 12:31 pm

Yeah.. bring back Neil Ruddock / Gary McAllister / Steve McMahon / Tommy Smith / Paul Ince / Souness, the list is endless. Like the other topic about yard dogs, have you noticed how well Liverpool do if we have some hard players in the middle of the midfield/defence?

by **Big Niall** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 1:39 pm

Not just "hard men" in the middle. Every player should have a bit of fire in them.

Manu at their best had schmeichel, bruce, pallister, ince, keane, robson,hughes, cantona, kanchelskis etc. all had fire.

by **109-1105722616** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 1:45 pm

thats what everton have is a good battling team and although they are rubbish to watch, they still get the results.

and no im not a bluenose, im just saying that statistics dont lie, and prehaps battling is the way

by **ronmeister** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 2:09 pm

its a hard one to call,I'm a firm beleiver in quality will allways shine through but i do think a few players are very weak(not sure if weak is the right word) and do get bullied a bit which in turn stop's them playing there game.Who would we lose if we bring in a tough midfielder?

by **109-1105722616** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 2:10 pm

biscan, it wouldnt bother me

by **ronmeister** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 2:20 pm

Yeah i agree with that Mark but when we have Alonso gerrard in the middle who would we lose then,But saying that we dont seem to have a problem when Alonso play's ,makes me think that maybe we dont need a hardman just better allround squad players to cover injuries

by **andy_g** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 4:38 pm

i wouldn't say its a question of finding 'hard' players - more a question of getting some of ours to be a bit tougher and more committed. so i would say yes, we're a bit soft.

at the risk of invoking the names of those we dislike look at how man u and everton play. they play a hard physical game and get results. man u in particular outmuscled arsenal's skillful players twice. there's no way i want to see us ending up as a team that can only kick the other team, i love to see us play beautiful football, but we need to be able to stand up for ourselves when necessary.

by **109-1105722616** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 5:45 pm

i think i mentioned it in another thread, alonso and gerrard seem to compliment each other, as alonso does a lot more with the ball and this enables stevie g to channel his energy more effectively, whether it be tackling or passing, he is not trying to carry the team on his own

by **yckatbjywtbiastkamb** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:54 pm

marklfc wrote:i think i mentioned it in another thread, alonso and gerrard seem to compliment each other, as alonso does a lot more with the ball and this enables stevie g to channel his energy more effectively, whether it be tackling or passing, he is not trying to carry the team on his own

yeah, i agree. it`s like gerrards game lifts a level knowing that if he makes a forward run its not going to be a waste of time because there`s a good chance alonso will find him. when he looks around at biscan and hamaan in possession he seems to think to himself whats the use of bombing on, i`ll only have to chase back in a moment anyway.
also gerrard seems to trust xavi with holding the midfield because gerrard often goes wide to find space and ghosts in behind the defence. a few times xavi has found gerrard on the flanks in acres of space in dangerous positions.
as you said mark, they are two players whose games compliment each other.

by **hawkmoon269** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:11 pm

Yeah I agree. But as was said earlier there is 2 ways of looking at "soft". In the games where we've played well this season, we played with passion. We chased every ball, and challenged hard, defending from the front. But most of all we wanted to win more than the other team (in the case of Chelski, we were robbed by the ref!!).

by **Iceman69** » Thu Feb 17, 2005 1:57 am

Big Niall wrote:It seems that a physical team can bully Liverpool out of a game. Carragher and SG have metal but the others all seam a bit soft.

I know we are poor quality but we still are better quality than Birmingham. I think we lack a bit of balls.

Yeah I agree!

Whats happening now is.... all the so called lesser teams, ie. the spurs, charlton, birmingham Bolton etc, are getting stronger all round, and we need to adapt to stay ahead.

When you see te likes of chelsea and Arsenal "bossing" many games, its beacause they have total control.
its not just about getting someone like a roy keane or a greame souness type player, although that is a good thing to have.

I think its far more important just to get players who can keep the ball when they get it. and not give it away so much

by **LiverpoolMadman** » Thu Feb 17, 2005 3:02 am

I think 2-3 months ago I have told you all that we are "soft". Not onlt that Hamman , Hypia and Biscan is too old for the club. We need new blood in our team .

by **azriahmad** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 5:51 am

Quality should eventually shine through but toughness to withstand the physical nature of the EPL is a required quality. This ares, as well as heart, is very much lacking in some of the lads.

by **112-1077774096** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 6:37 am

i dont think we are soft, i think sometimes the efort is lacking. we have players who will leave their foot in but it just seems that we are happy to be second best to every 50/50 ball, w also dont press the other team when they are in posession

Liverpool FC Forum

Are the team "soft"

Who is online